ReviewPain management2025
Spinal cord stimulation protocols for modern pain management: from two-stage models to direct-to-implant strategies.
Review in Pain management, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The direct-to-implant (DTI) approach to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) represents an emerging paradigm in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain. Unlike the conventional two-stage models, which include a preliminary trial phase, the DTI strategy involves immediate permanent implantation in carefully selected patients. This article explores the rationale, clinical outcomes, and practical implications of adopting a single-stage implantation model. Drawing on recent evidence from randomized trials, real-world studies, health economic analyses, and patient preference data, this perspective highlights how the DTI approach may achieve comparable long-term pain relief and functional improvement while minimizing procedural burden, infection risk, and healthcare costs. It also discusses the essential role of rigorous patient selection and intraoperative assessment in ensuring safe and effective use of this model. The literature discussed was identified through non-systematic searches of PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar (January 2010-May 2025). By focusing on the clinical and economic value of DTI, this article challenges the assumption that a trial phase is universally necessary and proposes a more flexible, evidence-informed strategy for SCS implantation. As healthcare systems increasingly emphasize patient-centered and cost-effective care, the DTI strategy emerges as a practical and efficient option for managing chronic pain in carefully selected patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.